passed or proposed that touch on the 2nd, I note these:
HB2513: The bill would allow students to carry firearms on campus if they are at least 21 and are licensed to carry a concealed weapon. "As long as students kept their weapons concealed, they could go into class with them," Murphey said. He said he decided that the bill was needed after the Feb. 14 shootings that left six dead, including the gunman, at Northern Illinois University and an attack in April at Virginia Tech in which a gunman killed 32 people.
Of course, one of the objections is Rep. Paul Roan, an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper for 25 years, voted against the bill, saying such a law could greatly hinder law enforcement.
"You wouldn't know who the players are," he said. Because weapons now are banned, he said, police can tell if someone comes onto campus "with a gun for evil purposes."
No you can't, sir; you have no damned idea if someone has 'evil purposes' in mind or is just concerned with protecting themselves if some dirtbag decides to get his name in the media. And it doesn't do any good for the cops to 'know who the players are' when that means they find a bunch of dead students and teachers and a bad guy. When they finally get there.
Which is the reason for this bill: the cops always get there after pretty much everybody who will die, is dead. It may sound very nice to say "We need to know who the players are", but that is covered very nicely by "Some guy just started shooting at people, and a guy in class shot him. Yeah, we're in the classroom and we'll stay here 'till you get here." on the phone. Or simply the good guy setting his piece on a desk- unloaded if there's time- and saying "My sidearm's over there." Or something similar.
Second, a while back OK passes a law basically saying that employers couldn't fire someone for having a firearm locked in their vehicle. And some people are not happy about it:
ConocoPhillips Co. and other smaller employers in a court case contend the law constitutes "an unconstitutional taking of (their) property" and their right to exclude people from their property. That argument is in a new filing by the employers at the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. They want the court to uphold a decision of U.S. District Judge Terence Kern in Tulsa who struck down the law.
Now a couple of other groups are getting in on it:
Two major safety and security organizations - the American Society of Safety Engineers and ASIS International - joined the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in filing a "friend of the court" brief urging the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm a 2007 federal district court ruling striking down Oklahoma's 2005 guns-at-work law as unconstitutional. In a suit filed by ConocoPhillips and others - ConocoPhillips v. Henry - the lower court held that the law, which made it a crime in Oklahoma for employers to bar guns from company property, impermissibly conflicted with the general duty under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act for all employers to provide workplaces free from recognized hazards.
To me, the 'right to exclude people from their property' argument sounds like BS; they're not 'excluding people', they're telling people they can't have something in their vehicle. And the 'providing a workplace free from recognized hazards' is standard Brady Coalition to Ban Firearms and other nanny groups crap.
One more set of battles.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
The aftermath of a screwed-up SWAT incident
The handwritten settlement reached this week that resolved the fallout over the shooting death of 18-year-old Peyton Strickland included just three main points, officials say.
They were: $2.45 million, headed to a scholarship fund; an apology, issued Wednesday; and an audit of the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office's Emergency Response Team. On Thursday, county officials said plans for the review aren't set but they are open to outside advice.
...
Attention turned to the office's Emergency Response Team on Dec. 1, 2006, when Cpl. Christopher M. Long mistook the sound of a battering ram for gunfire during a raid.
He fired through a door, killing Strickland, a student at Cape Fear Community College, who was wanted in connection with the robbery of video game equipment. Strickland wasn't armed. Causey said Wednesday that Long mis-evaluated the threat. A grand jury considered the case but chose not to indict.
On the face of it the most basic point is that the officer screwed up: he heard what he thought was gunfire and shot through a door. SERIOUS violation of basic firearms rules, the kind that generally has police and prosecutors trying to hang a citizen who does such. I dug around in some earlier stories and found this:
His gear included a hood, earpiece and helmet that he said muffled his hearing.
So part of his excuse(and I have to use that word) for shooting through a door is he had so much equipment on he couldn't hear very well. Wonderful.
Yes, I am being snarky. The biggest factor of this is a SWAT team was used when it wasn't called for. Again. And again, somebody wound up dead.
One of the reasons I get so damn tired of hearing about cases like this is I get tired of seeing things like that illustrated below:
A New Hanover County Sheriff's Department ERT member walks through Taylor Homes during a search for escaped inmate Joseph Corbett Wednesday afternoon.
I understand the armor, etc. But would someone please explain, in simple terms my mind can wrap around, why they're wearing masks? They're searching for an escapee, not undercover agents who need to keep their faces hidden, dammit: WHY do they have to hide their faces?
Dammit.
They were: $2.45 million, headed to a scholarship fund; an apology, issued Wednesday; and an audit of the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office's Emergency Response Team. On Thursday, county officials said plans for the review aren't set but they are open to outside advice.
...
Attention turned to the office's Emergency Response Team on Dec. 1, 2006, when Cpl. Christopher M. Long mistook the sound of a battering ram for gunfire during a raid.
He fired through a door, killing Strickland, a student at Cape Fear Community College, who was wanted in connection with the robbery of video game equipment. Strickland wasn't armed. Causey said Wednesday that Long mis-evaluated the threat. A grand jury considered the case but chose not to indict.
On the face of it the most basic point is that the officer screwed up: he heard what he thought was gunfire and shot through a door. SERIOUS violation of basic firearms rules, the kind that generally has police and prosecutors trying to hang a citizen who does such. I dug around in some earlier stories and found this:
His gear included a hood, earpiece and helmet that he said muffled his hearing.
So part of his excuse(and I have to use that word) for shooting through a door is he had so much equipment on he couldn't hear very well. Wonderful.
Yes, I am being snarky. The biggest factor of this is a SWAT team was used when it wasn't called for. Again. And again, somebody wound up dead.
One of the reasons I get so damn tired of hearing about cases like this is I get tired of seeing things like that illustrated below:
A New Hanover County Sheriff's Department ERT member walks through Taylor Homes during a search for escaped inmate Joseph Corbett Wednesday afternoon.
I understand the armor, etc. But would someone please explain, in simple terms my mind can wrap around, why they're wearing masks? They're searching for an escapee, not undercover agents who need to keep their faces hidden, dammit: WHY do they have to hide their faces?
Dammit.
Threats to Prince Harry's life from the usual suspects
Thoughts of a crusade seem more appropriate lately.
Ran across this, which you may have already seen: it seems the islamist dirtbags have now decided that Prince Harry is an 'legitimate target' because he's 'acting tough', etc.
Considering these threats tend to come from the same goat-humpers who think it's a fine demonstration of faith to blow up kids in a school, or women in a market, or murder men who have the temerity to work as, say, police, their claims of upset don't exactly tug at my heartstrings. Do deal with a couple of things right off:
Omar Bakri Mohammad is a miserable, cowardly, chickenshit little offspring of a camel that was sold as a whore and a distempered mongrel. He wouldn't know a 'tough man' if- I take that back: he'd know a tough man because that'd be one of the troops ready to whack him. So your opinion, Omar, counts for less than the dog crap I had to scrape off my boot a while ago. Fuck you.
Rafiq Choudhry, 69, said: “The Royal Family is supposed to be neutral. If Prince Harry wants to be neutral he should not fight against Muslims.” Got news for you, dumbass: the Royal Family is NOT supposed to be neutral in facing threats to Britain, or civilization in general. And(to explain this because you're evidently too effing stupid to understand it on your own) he's NOT fighting against 'muslims'; he was fighting against a bunch of miserable excuses for men who think it's God's will to murder little girls for going to school, or their mothers for not dressing in a tent, or their fathers and brothers for not acting 'muslim enough' to suit the islamist assholes. So fuck you, too.
Britain really needs to get of its collective ass and
A: round up a bunch of the illegals and those aiding terrorists and prosecute and/or deport them, and
B: get their leaders off the "PC at any cost" throne.
The latter being just why so may of these child-murdering dirtbags keep doing and saying these things and getting away with them. Hell, they've got some of them living on welfare while calling for blood and death to the infidels, etc.
And do take note of this bullcrap:
Catherine Heseltine of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee warned that many might find Harry's "glorification" of war offensive. She said: "It is not the way to talk about a war where so many Muslims have lost their lives - men, women and children, innocent civilians. It is not an adventure, it is not exciting."
Madam, show me one place where he's said it was 'glorious'; and I'll bet it got real damn exciting at times, though not in the slanderous way you mean it. And the reason "... so many Muslims have lost their lives - men, women and children, innocent civilians." is because radical muslim terrorists and islamists murdered them; dirtbags you, you bitch, seem to want to defend. Anyone who can think that fighting child-murdering terrorists equals murdering innocents is a friggin' moron. And as big a bigot as you'll run across.
Whatever his faults- a being human he has them- the guy fought like hell to stay with his unit, and when unable to did service in another where he'd still be except for the information getting out. Harry, I ever meet you, the drinks are on me. And thanks for being one of those who put his ass on the line fighting the bad guys.
Considering these threats tend to come from the same goat-humpers who think it's a fine demonstration of faith to blow up kids in a school, or women in a market, or murder men who have the temerity to work as, say, police, their claims of upset don't exactly tug at my heartstrings. Do deal with a couple of things right off:
Omar Bakri Mohammad is a miserable, cowardly, chickenshit little offspring of a camel that was sold as a whore and a distempered mongrel. He wouldn't know a 'tough man' if- I take that back: he'd know a tough man because that'd be one of the troops ready to whack him. So your opinion, Omar, counts for less than the dog crap I had to scrape off my boot a while ago. Fuck you.
Rafiq Choudhry, 69, said: “The Royal Family is supposed to be neutral. If Prince Harry wants to be neutral he should not fight against Muslims.” Got news for you, dumbass: the Royal Family is NOT supposed to be neutral in facing threats to Britain, or civilization in general. And(to explain this because you're evidently too effing stupid to understand it on your own) he's NOT fighting against 'muslims'; he was fighting against a bunch of miserable excuses for men who think it's God's will to murder little girls for going to school, or their mothers for not dressing in a tent, or their fathers and brothers for not acting 'muslim enough' to suit the islamist assholes. So fuck you, too.
Britain really needs to get of its collective ass and
A: round up a bunch of the illegals and those aiding terrorists and prosecute and/or deport them, and
B: get their leaders off the "PC at any cost" throne.
The latter being just why so may of these child-murdering dirtbags keep doing and saying these things and getting away with them. Hell, they've got some of them living on welfare while calling for blood and death to the infidels, etc.
And do take note of this bullcrap:
Catherine Heseltine of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee warned that many might find Harry's "glorification" of war offensive. She said: "It is not the way to talk about a war where so many Muslims have lost their lives - men, women and children, innocent civilians. It is not an adventure, it is not exciting."
Madam, show me one place where he's said it was 'glorious'; and I'll bet it got real damn exciting at times, though not in the slanderous way you mean it. And the reason
Whatever his faults- a being human he has them- the guy fought like hell to stay with his unit, and when unable to did service in another where he'd still be except for the information getting out. Harry, I ever meet you, the drinks are on me. And thanks for being one of those who put his ass on the line fighting the bad guys.
Friday, February 29, 2008
More on the infection problems in Brit hospitals
Theo had a link to this:
Deaths from the hospital superbug C. diff have soared to record levels in a damning indictment of hygiene levels in the Health Service.
The Clostridium difficile stomach bug killed or hastened the death of almost 6,500 patients in 2006 - a staggering 72 per cent rise on the previous year.
And since 1990 the number of people infected by the bug has risen almost 50-fold. It is a bigger killer than MRSA.
Patients' representatives and politicians said the figures highlighted the failure of numerous Government drives to halt the rise of the bug, which thrives in filthy conditions and can be combated with simple soap and water.
Take note of that last sentence, and then this:
He added: "Since 2006 we have taken significant steps to tackle infections.
"These include stringent handwashing guidance for the NHS, a bare-below-the-elbows dress code, putting matrons back in charge of cleanliness on their wards and an on-going deep clean of every ward.
But the 'bare-below-the-elbows dress code' is exactly what the idiot-level muslims are objecting to. Maybe, just maybe, these numbers might get some of the PC-at-all-costs fools to stop playing games..
Deaths from the hospital superbug C. diff have soared to record levels in a damning indictment of hygiene levels in the Health Service.
The Clostridium difficile stomach bug killed or hastened the death of almost 6,500 patients in 2006 - a staggering 72 per cent rise on the previous year.
And since 1990 the number of people infected by the bug has risen almost 50-fold. It is a bigger killer than MRSA.
Patients' representatives and politicians said the figures highlighted the failure of numerous Government drives to halt the rise of the bug, which thrives in filthy conditions and can be combated with simple soap and water.
Take note of that last sentence, and then this:
He added: "Since 2006 we have taken significant steps to tackle infections.
"These include stringent handwashing guidance for the NHS, a bare-below-the-elbows dress code, putting matrons back in charge of cleanliness on their wards and an on-going deep clean of every ward.
But the 'bare-below-the-elbows dress code' is exactly what the idiot-level muslims are objecting to. Maybe, just maybe, these numbers might get some of the PC-at-all-costs fools to stop playing games..
Thursday, February 28, 2008
People the major media won't tell you about
because it wouldn't match up with their 'evil soldiers committing war crimes' storyline.
The three humvees were disabled by the VBIED and an immediate second blast which “came from nowhere”. Then all hell broke loose. The Marines were in a pre-registered and pre-planned kill zone. RPG’s, mortars, and small arms fire tore into the Marines. Knowing the Marines’ Rules of Engagement, the insurgents had positioned some of their heavy weapons in a hospital offering a devastating field of fire on the ambush site.
The three humvees were disabled by the VBIED and an immediate second blast which “came from nowhere”. Then all hell broke loose. The Marines were in a pre-registered and pre-planned kill zone. RPG’s, mortars, and small arms fire tore into the Marines. Knowing the Marines’ Rules of Engagement, the insurgents had positioned some of their heavy weapons in a hospital offering a devastating field of fire on the ambush site.
The dismounted QRF was devastated by the initial fusilade of fire. Of 16 Marines, 11 were down, with three killed instantly. Lance Cpl. Corbin immediately positioned his truck between the downed Marines and the bulk of the enemy forces. He leaped from his vehicle into the middle of the enemy fire and began directing those that could still shoulder a weapon to return fire, marking targets and taking control of the situation.
He then ran to his seriously wounded patrol leader, threw him over his shoulder and ran 40 yards back to his vehicle. Running under fire the whole way, he returned fire with his offhand while the Sergeant bled out on his shoulder.
Go read it. These people need to be recognized and remembered.Remember the problems in Brit hospitals
with muslims not wanting to expose their indecent wrists and forearms to wash properly?
Muslim medical workers in three major English cities are balking at hospital hygiene rules such as rolling up their sleeves when they scrub for surgery, according to The Daily Mail.
Health officials have been ready to wash their hands of the dispute, but at least one hospital is bending to the requests.
Female med students and staff at hospitals in at least a trio of large British cities — Liverpool, Leicester and Sheffield — have continued to flat-out refuse to comply with regulations aimed at fending off germs and infections, the Mail reported, with some saying they'd rather quit than expose their arms.
So get your sorry ass out of the profession. Or go somewhere that proper hygiene isn't considered such an important thing.
The workers object on the grounds that showing their forearms is immodest for women who practice Islam and against their religion. Hygiene gurus insist that no exceptions should be made for religious or other reasons.
I repeat what I said before: someone needs to say "My religion forbids letting patients suffer infections because idiots won't properly wash up. Either follow the rules or get out." 'Hygiene gurus' my ass, that's called 'proper procedures'. Instead, they get this:
At the Liverpool children's hospital, medical students gave a thumbs-down to pushing up or removing long sleeves while assisting in treating patients and washing their hands.
They asked for some concessions, and the hospital is complying.
Students. Refusing to follow the rules and making demands. And the hospital iscomplying caving in. And, of course, nothing of this sort would be complete without
The Islamic Medical Association has gotten involved, telling Muslim women in the field that they must stay covered.
I wonder just what excuses the hospitals give to patients fighting infections spread by these idiots? Or the families of the people who died of them?
Muslim medical workers in three major English cities are balking at hospital hygiene rules such as rolling up their sleeves when they scrub for surgery, according to The Daily Mail.
Health officials have been ready to wash their hands of the dispute, but at least one hospital is bending to the requests.
Female med students and staff at hospitals in at least a trio of large British cities — Liverpool, Leicester and Sheffield — have continued to flat-out refuse to comply with regulations aimed at fending off germs and infections, the Mail reported, with some saying they'd rather quit than expose their arms.
So get your sorry ass out of the profession. Or go somewhere that proper hygiene isn't considered such an important thing.
The workers object on the grounds that showing their forearms is immodest for women who practice Islam and against their religion. Hygiene gurus insist that no exceptions should be made for religious or other reasons.
I repeat what I said before: someone needs to say "My religion forbids letting patients suffer infections because idiots won't properly wash up. Either follow the rules or get out." 'Hygiene gurus' my ass, that's called 'proper procedures'. Instead, they get this:
At the Liverpool children's hospital, medical students gave a thumbs-down to pushing up or removing long sleeves while assisting in treating patients and washing their hands.
They asked for some concessions, and the hospital is complying.
Students. Refusing to follow the rules and making demands. And the hospital is
The Islamic Medical Association has gotten involved, telling Muslim women in the field that they must stay covered.
I wonder just what excuses the hospitals give to patients fighting infections spread by these idiots? Or the families of the people who died of them?
Dumb crooks, 0:
Bikers, 2.5*
Two masked and machete-wielding men who barged into a club in Sydney, Australia, couldn't have picked a worse night for their robbery -- a monthly meeting of bikers.
...
"These guys were absolutely dumb as bricks," Jerry Vancornewal, leader of the bikers, told CNN Thursday. "I can't believe they saw all the bikes parked up front and they were so stupid that they walked past in."
Hehehehehe. If this doesn't get your sense of humor going, there's no hope for you.
Hearing the commotion from an adjacent room, Vancornewal and his pals with the Southern Cross Cruiser motorcycle club stomped through to the bar area to intervene.
"They (the robbers) thought they had the upper advantage with their knives and their machetes," Jim Webb, night supervisor of the club, told CNN. "They didn't expect to run into a bunch of guys carrying chairs and tables."
...
The second man made a break for it through the club's service entrance, but the bikers tackled him near a neighbor's fence.
"We just grabbed him, crash-tackled him to the ground, hogtied him with electrical wire and left him for the cops," Vancornewal said.
...
A third person, who was waiting in a getaway car, took off when the bikers threw pieces of furniture at him, Webb said. Police have not located him.
"AAAAAH! THEY'RE FIGHTING BACK!"
*Due to only two being captured. Though the getaway car being chased away with furniture probably ought to get them a 2.75.
Two masked and machete-wielding men who barged into a club in Sydney, Australia, couldn't have picked a worse night for their robbery -- a monthly meeting of bikers.
...
"These guys were absolutely dumb as bricks," Jerry Vancornewal, leader of the bikers, told CNN Thursday. "I can't believe they saw all the bikes parked up front and they were so stupid that they walked past in."
Hehehehehe. If this doesn't get your sense of humor going, there's no hope for you.
Hearing the commotion from an adjacent room, Vancornewal and his pals with the Southern Cross Cruiser motorcycle club stomped through to the bar area to intervene.
"They (the robbers) thought they had the upper advantage with their knives and their machetes," Jim Webb, night supervisor of the club, told CNN. "They didn't expect to run into a bunch of guys carrying chairs and tables."
...
The second man made a break for it through the club's service entrance, but the bikers tackled him near a neighbor's fence.
"We just grabbed him, crash-tackled him to the ground, hogtied him with electrical wire and left him for the cops," Vancornewal said.
...
A third person, who was waiting in a getaway car, took off when the bikers threw pieces of furniture at him, Webb said. Police have not located him.
"AAAAAH! THEY'RE FIGHTING BACK!"
*Due to only two being captured. Though the getaway car being chased away with furniture probably ought to get them a 2.75.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
The joys of computers
as noted by Hogboy and Kim.
Part of the problem is idiocy, and part of it is "But EVERYBODY knows that!" when EVERYBODY very obviously doesn't. But the idiots who put together the 'help' files and- back when companies still supplied them- manuals never seemed to understand that. So you had manuals and help files that left out parts of how to do something. Because 'everybody knows that'.
Which leads to frustration and thoughts of hanging Bill Gates & Co. by a shoelace over a deep, rocky canyon.
Part of the problem is idiocy, and part of it is "But EVERYBODY knows that!" when EVERYBODY very obviously doesn't. But the idiots who put together the 'help' files and- back when companies still supplied them- manuals never seemed to understand that. So you had manuals and help files that left out parts of how to do something. Because 'everybody knows that'.
Which leads to frustration and thoughts of hanging Bill Gates & Co. by a shoelace over a deep, rocky canyon.
Why the BBC should be counted as
'On the other side'.
A BBC producer failed to give police information that would have helped track down the July 21 bombers, the trial was told.
Don't Panic, I'm Islamic, which featured the group paintballing and an interview with Mohammed Hamid, was shown on BBC2 on June 12, 2005.
Obviously a good British subject of the Crown, right?
Oops.
Nasreen Suleaman, the producer, told the court that Hamid said he would use his £300 fee to settle the fine he had been given by magistrates for racially abusing two policemen at his Oxford Street stall.
Remember during the Iraq invasion when the crews of British warships asked to have some of the news from Britain turned off because it was basically sympathizing with the enemy?
Miss Suleaman claimed she told BBC managers of the situation but no one passed on the information to the authorities.
She looked visibly shaken when told that two of the July 21 bombers, had joined Hamid on another paintball trip two weeks before the bombings.
Miss Suleaman saw Hamid a few days after July 21, 2005 and he seemed "very shocked that the men he knew were accused of this".
Duncan Penny, prosecuting, said: "Did you tell him to go to the police?"
Ms Suleaman replied: "I don't think I needed to."
A BBC producer failed to give police information that would have helped track down the July 21 bombers, the trial was told.
Don't Panic, I'm Islamic, which featured the group paintballing and an interview with Mohammed Hamid, was shown on BBC2 on June 12, 2005.
Obviously a good British subject of the Crown, right?
Oops.
Nasreen Suleaman, the producer, told the court that Hamid said he would use his £300 fee to settle the fine he had been given by magistrates for racially abusing two policemen at his Oxford Street stall.
Remember during the Iraq invasion when the crews of British warships asked to have some of the news from Britain turned off because it was basically sympathizing with the enemy?
Miss Suleaman claimed she told BBC managers of the situation but no one passed on the information to the authorities.
She looked visibly shaken when told that two of the July 21 bombers, had joined Hamid on another paintball trip two weeks before the bombings.
Miss Suleaman saw Hamid a few days after July 21, 2005 and he seemed "very shocked that the men he knew were accused of this".
Duncan Penny, prosecuting, said: "Did you tell him to go to the police?"
Ms Suleaman replied: "I don't think I needed to."
Monday, February 25, 2008
And to concentrate on the boys for a minute,
have your sons read the previous and then ask some questions. And I'm sure you can think of some.
If you're one of those more delusional types who think "MY son is a paragon of virtue, and I do not need to worry about this", I've got news for you: with very rare exceptions, your kid is just as horny as all the others, and on the subject of sex has about as much self-control, as issued from the factory, as a ferret in a box of packing peanuts. Which means you have to prepare them for what amounts to an open buffet in high school and college. For that matter, it starts in middle school for a bunch of them, which means you'd better talk about this mess with them early.
Two things for them to learn. Number one is the older problem that unpleasant things can happen to people who sleep around, ranging from minor infections to "I missed my period!" conversations to being screwed over by finding out that someone you thought actually liked you actually just wanted the use of your penis for a while. Or was just drunk and thought you looked like some actor she's got the hots for. Or both.
Second is the stuff Mac Donald pointed out. That chickie who sucked up booze like a vacuum pump and then sucked up you like said vacuum can, the next day(or week or month) screw your whole life up if she decides
A: "I wish I hadn't done that", followed by
B: "Therefore(according to current feminist theory), I WAS RAPED!"
She's got a whole damn network that'll support her and back her up and blame you for every damn thing, and that generally includes the school. Because no educrat wants to be accused of 'not supporting female students/womyn/the oppressed sex'; I mean, God, people might think they're not progressive and feminist themselves! Remember what happened a while ago at Harvard? The dean had the nerve to actually suggest the difference in numbers between males & females in some fields might be due to differences between the sexes, and the Legion of the Eternally Offended tried to destroy him. And did a pretty good job of it. Kid, do you think they'd have a second thought about stomping on you?
Another of the unpleasant facts of this mess is that she doesn't have to actually start this herself. All it takes is a somewhat radical friend who hears "I wish I hadn't done that" and pushes her to file a complaint. Or talks to some idiot teacher/professor who then pressures her into "acting to prevent this predator from harming other women", etc.
And the last is the very simple question to ask when they're old enough: do you really want to spend parties dipping your wick into every drunk female who decides she wants you? After all the other guys who've been doing so at the other parties? As somebody once put it, you screw her, you're also screwing everybody else she's screwed. And considering what you know about some of those guys, do you REALLY want that level of shared contact with them? Which question can go to daughters, too: considering what you know about some of these girls, do you REALLY what that level of shared contact with them by grabbing some guy they nailed at the last party?
To you parents, grandparents, aunts & uncles and just plain concerned friends: ain't all this fun?
If you're one of those more delusional types who think "MY son is a paragon of virtue, and I do not need to worry about this", I've got news for you: with very rare exceptions, your kid is just as horny as all the others, and on the subject of sex has about as much self-control, as issued from the factory, as a ferret in a box of packing peanuts. Which means you have to prepare them for what amounts to an open buffet in high school and college. For that matter, it starts in middle school for a bunch of them, which means you'd better talk about this mess with them early.
Two things for them to learn. Number one is the older problem that unpleasant things can happen to people who sleep around, ranging from minor infections to "I missed my period!" conversations to being screwed over by finding out that someone you thought actually liked you actually just wanted the use of your penis for a while. Or was just drunk and thought you looked like some actor she's got the hots for. Or both.
Second is the stuff Mac Donald pointed out. That chickie who sucked up booze like a vacuum pump and then sucked up you like said vacuum can, the next day(or week or month) screw your whole life up if she decides
A: "I wish I hadn't done that", followed by
B: "Therefore(according to current feminist theory), I WAS RAPED!"
She's got a whole damn network that'll support her and back her up and blame you for every damn thing, and that generally includes the school. Because no educrat wants to be accused of 'not supporting female students/womyn/the oppressed sex'; I mean, God, people might think they're not progressive and feminist themselves! Remember what happened a while ago at Harvard? The dean had the nerve to actually suggest the difference in numbers between males & females in some fields might be due to differences between the sexes, and the Legion of the Eternally Offended tried to destroy him. And did a pretty good job of it. Kid, do you think they'd have a second thought about stomping on you?
Another of the unpleasant facts of this mess is that she doesn't have to actually start this herself. All it takes is a somewhat radical friend who hears "I wish I hadn't done that" and pushes her to file a complaint. Or talks to some idiot teacher/professor who then pressures her into "acting to prevent this predator from harming other women", etc.
And the last is the very simple question to ask when they're old enough: do you really want to spend parties dipping your wick into every drunk female who decides she wants you? After all the other guys who've been doing so at the other parties? As somebody once put it, you screw her, you're also screwing everybody else she's screwed. And considering what you know about some of those guys, do you REALLY want that level of shared contact with them? Which question can go to daughters, too: considering what you know about some of these girls, do you REALLY what that level of shared contact with them by grabbing some guy they nailed at the last party?
To you parents, grandparents, aunts & uncles and just plain concerned friends: ain't all this fun?
The Campus Rape Myth
If you've got kids in or going to college, and you haven't already thought about this mess- or God forbid, had to deal with it- read this. You already know things are messed up in our universities, but this points out just how bad this mess has become.
Mac Donald writes about girls going to parties with the intention of getting drunk and getting laid, which- unhappily- isn't a surprise to me. Daughter told of friends going out on Thursday nights- the big party night- to watch the Walk of Shame as they called it: girls who'd gone to a frat party to get drunk and laid walking back to the dorm, sometimes still drunk and sometimes somewhat sober, with their panties in their purse. Apparently it was a fair spectacle, and unless the weather was really ratty it happened most weeks.
There are a lot of people out there who have a lot to answer for, for what they've done to our kids. You can prepare them for this kind of garbage but it's still a threat. And so much of it boils down to "You are not responsible if bad things happen." Well, sometimes not. But if you act in ways that lead to a problem, if you go out wanting a situation to happen, you damn sure DO have responsibility in it. This bit covers the thoughts of the 'experts':
But suggest to a rape bureaucrat that female students should behave with greater sexual restraint as a preventive measure, and you might as well be saying that the girls should enter a convent or don the burka. “I am uncomfortable with the idea,” e-mailed Hillary Wing-Richards, the associate director of the Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Women’s Resource Center at James Madison University in Virginia. “This indicates that if [female students] are raped it could be their fault—it is never their fault—and how one dresses does not invite rape or violence. . . . I would never allow my staff or myself to send the message it is the victim’s fault due to their dress or lack of restraint in any way.” Putting on a tight tank top doesn’t, of course, lead to what the bureaucrats call “rape.” But taking off that tank top does increase the risk of sexual intercourse that will be later regretted, especially when the tank-topper has been intently mainlining rum and Cokes all evening.(bold mine)
Think about that. Not only does getting drunk and bedding some guy, and regretting it the next day now constitute 'rape' to these people, they've reduced these females to beings incapable of being responsible for their actions; they can't be blamed, oh no, it's the guys' fault. Every time. You went out with the intention of getting drunk and 'hooking up' with some guy? Not your fault something happened, ever.
If you've got a daughter in or going to college, and you haven't already, talk to her about this bullshit. This crap has already screwed up too damn many lives.
Mac Donald writes about girls going to parties with the intention of getting drunk and getting laid, which- unhappily- isn't a surprise to me. Daughter told of friends going out on Thursday nights- the big party night- to watch the Walk of Shame as they called it: girls who'd gone to a frat party to get drunk and laid walking back to the dorm, sometimes still drunk and sometimes somewhat sober, with their panties in their purse. Apparently it was a fair spectacle, and unless the weather was really ratty it happened most weeks.
There are a lot of people out there who have a lot to answer for, for what they've done to our kids. You can prepare them for this kind of garbage but it's still a threat. And so much of it boils down to "You are not responsible if bad things happen." Well, sometimes not. But if you act in ways that lead to a problem, if you go out wanting a situation to happen, you damn sure DO have responsibility in it. This bit covers the thoughts of the 'experts':
But suggest to a rape bureaucrat that female students should behave with greater sexual restraint as a preventive measure, and you might as well be saying that the girls should enter a convent or don the burka. “I am uncomfortable with the idea,” e-mailed Hillary Wing-Richards, the associate director of the Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Women’s Resource Center at James Madison University in Virginia. “This indicates that if [female students] are raped it could be their fault—it is never their fault—and how one dresses does not invite rape or violence. . . . I would never allow my staff or myself to send the message it is the victim’s fault due to their dress or lack of restraint in any way.” Putting on a tight tank top doesn’t, of course, lead to what the bureaucrats call “rape.” But taking off that tank top does increase the risk of sexual intercourse that will be later regretted, especially when the tank-topper has been intently mainlining rum and Cokes all evening.(bold mine)
Think about that. Not only does getting drunk and bedding some guy, and regretting it the next day now constitute 'rape' to these people, they've reduced these females to beings incapable of being responsible for their actions; they can't be blamed, oh no, it's the guys' fault. Every time. You went out with the intention of getting drunk and 'hooking up' with some guy? Not your fault something happened, ever.
If you've got a daughter in or going to college, and you haven't already, talk to her about this bullshit. This crap has already screwed up too damn many lives.
Speaking of cats,
first read this; then I've got a story.
Back? Ok, years ago, during first marriage, we had a cat. Started out as a black & white fuzzball that grew into a 14-pound cat. Overall very nice critter; any ambushes he pulled were in playing. Worst that ever happened was when he was about, oh, two pounds. I was sitting on the floor, talking on the phone, and he decided to head for my shoulder. Which involved the jump landing him on my back and of COURSE he had to hold on... Iscreamedyelled, he ran away, and no permanent harm done(what he once did to a vet is a whole 'nother story).
Well, he grew up downright protective of his territory. To the extent my wife once observed two dogs coming down the street see him sitting on the porch and cross the street to pass our house. Well, one night wife woke me up from a sound sleep with a frantic whisper "Someone's messing with the front door!" I'm fumbling for the only pistol I owned- a .22 if it matters- and listening to some odd noise, finally gripped the pistol and eased into the living room. No, being a dumbass, no flashlight handy.
To set this up, one of the stereo speakers was sitting where, when the front door was open, it was right by the edge of the door. The noise was the cat. He was crouched on the speaker, almost vibrating, left front paw slightly raised, making a low moaning noise fit to raise the hair on your neck: low and, had it been directed at me, I'd have left. He was waiting for the door to open.
I eased up to the door and looked out. The storm door had been blocked open but nobody was there. Whether they'd heard me or the cat, I don't know. I opened up and checked around the porch, closed the storm door and locked up. The cat was still sitting there but considerably calmed down, and I stroked him and told him what a good kitty he was.
A time or two I've thought it would have been interesting had that jerk opened the door, but I'm glad he didn't: too much mess to clean up.
Back? Ok, years ago, during first marriage, we had a cat. Started out as a black & white fuzzball that grew into a 14-pound cat. Overall very nice critter; any ambushes he pulled were in playing. Worst that ever happened was when he was about, oh, two pounds. I was sitting on the floor, talking on the phone, and he decided to head for my shoulder. Which involved the jump landing him on my back and of COURSE he had to hold on... I
Well, he grew up downright protective of his territory. To the extent my wife once observed two dogs coming down the street see him sitting on the porch and cross the street to pass our house. Well, one night wife woke me up from a sound sleep with a frantic whisper "Someone's messing with the front door!" I'm fumbling for the only pistol I owned- a .22 if it matters- and listening to some odd noise, finally gripped the pistol and eased into the living room. No, being a dumbass, no flashlight handy.
To set this up, one of the stereo speakers was sitting where, when the front door was open, it was right by the edge of the door. The noise was the cat. He was crouched on the speaker, almost vibrating, left front paw slightly raised, making a low moaning noise fit to raise the hair on your neck: low and, had it been directed at me, I'd have left. He was waiting for the door to open.
I eased up to the door and looked out. The storm door had been blocked open but nobody was there. Whether they'd heard me or the cat, I don't know. I opened up and checked around the porch, closed the storm door and locked up. The cat was still sitting there but considerably calmed down, and I stroked him and told him what a good kitty he was.
A time or two I've thought it would have been interesting had that jerk opened the door, but I'm glad he didn't: too much mess to clean up.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Saturday, February 23, 2008
That brownie
does have a nasty sense of humor.
After I got home from work I spent another fifteen minutes(approximately) looking again for that firing pin stop. Flashlight and magnet both again. No joy.
Little while ago I went to a nearby mall for a bit so I could walk around without freezing my nose, came back and decided to walk to the liquor store for a bottle of something relaxing. Just before heading to the door I grabbed the Surefire and took another look. Here, there, over there where it couldn't possibly have bounced, nothing. Glanced down by an ammo box.
Understand something: the pile of stuff there, wasn't there yesterday evening. I'd picked every bit of that stuff up, checked them individually to see that it wasn't hung up/stuck on anything, then piled it up by the door while I searched, INCLUDING sweeping the area with the magnet broom my daughter gave me a couple of years ago. Then, after all that, picked the stuff up and set it near an ammo box(that had been moved and searched on/around/under). During the search after I got home had looked there and swung the broom over the spot. Again.
And I saw, as I glanced down, a shine. Which was the freshly filed part of the stop, laying ON TOP OF a piece of cord in the pile THAT HAD BEEN PICKED UP A PIECE AT A TIME AND MOVED. TWICE.
I can't remember, what's supposed to be a bribe for good behavior for the little buggers?
Well, at least he has decent timing on it. The Brownell's site was up and I'd marked a replacement, and was going to see if there was anything else I needed to order.
And it only took about twenty light file strokes on each side to finish fitting it(I'd gotten the thickness done yesterday).
After I got home from work I spent another fifteen minutes(approximately) looking again for that firing pin stop. Flashlight and magnet both again. No joy.
Little while ago I went to a nearby mall for a bit so I could walk around without freezing my nose, came back and decided to walk to the liquor store for a bottle of something relaxing. Just before heading to the door I grabbed the Surefire and took another look. Here, there, over there where it couldn't possibly have bounced, nothing. Glanced down by an ammo box.
Understand something: the pile of stuff there, wasn't there yesterday evening. I'd picked every bit of that stuff up, checked them individually to see that it wasn't hung up/stuck on anything, then piled it up by the door while I searched, INCLUDING sweeping the area with the magnet broom my daughter gave me a couple of years ago. Then, after all that, picked the stuff up and set it near an ammo box(that had been moved and searched on/around/under). During the search after I got home had looked there and swung the broom over the spot. Again.
And I saw, as I glanced down, a shine. Which was the freshly filed part of the stop, laying ON TOP OF a piece of cord in the pile THAT HAD BEEN PICKED UP A PIECE AT A TIME AND MOVED. TWICE.
I can't remember, what's supposed to be a bribe for good behavior for the little buggers?
Well, at least he has decent timing on it. The Brownell's site was up and I'd marked a replacement, and was going to see if there was anything else I needed to order.
And it only took about twenty light file strokes on each side to finish fitting it(I'd gotten the thickness done yesterday).
Friday, February 22, 2008
Right now, I'm about as frustrated as I can get
EGW oversize firing pin stop came in a couple of days ago, and I finally had time to sit down to fit it. Had it about halfway done. Made a couple of file strokes, blew it off, stood up to stretch and gave it a swipe on my jeans. It slipped.
I have spent the last 45 minutes, first with a flashlight, then with a magnet, then the light again. I've gone over the whole floor, I've moved things it couldn't physically have gotten to/behind, and I've gone over the floor by braille. I've shaken out shoes and the pockets of the jacket I was wearing- yes, even the off-side. And it's not to be found.
Seeing as how I cannot see God deciding to take an interest in my patience and making it go away(any deity, for that matter, even a drunk Irish one) to test my limits, I'm going with what my daughter once suggested: there's a brownie in the house, and it's either got a bad sense of humor or it's pissed at me.
No, I have not been drinking.
Yet.
I have spent the last 45 minutes, first with a flashlight, then with a magnet, then the light again. I've gone over the whole floor, I've moved things it couldn't physically have gotten to/behind, and I've gone over the floor by braille. I've shaken out shoes and the pockets of the jacket I was wearing- yes, even the off-side. And it's not to be found.
Seeing as how I cannot see God deciding to take an interest in my patience and making it go away(any deity, for that matter, even a drunk Irish one) to test my limits, I'm going with what my daughter once suggested: there's a brownie in the house, and it's either got a bad sense of humor or it's pissed at me.
No, I have not been drinking.
Yet.
Reasons #23 and #172 why we don't want Obama
in the Oval Office.
I've mentioned before that I generally don't watch the Presidential 'debates' because I consider most of what comes out to be a very low grade of fertilizer. So I didn't hear about the bullcrap from Obama until today. Good overall of the mess over at QandO:
And then we have the "capturing Taliban weapons" for resupply bit. Uh, really? So we have half a platoon commanded by a captain on its own in Afghanistan without enough humvees, weapons and ammo having to capture weapons from the bad guys in order to fight?
Whoa, John Wayne, Clint Eastwood and Rambo are jealous. And that's pretty much the realm in which this story or "anecdote" belongs.
But again, he didn't know enough about it to know that.
And so forth. McQ points out the big thing about this(aside from telling this in the first place) is that neither Obama or anybody on his staff either knew enough about the military to catch the bullcrap, or didn't bother to, you know, check it out. Not a good thing in someone who says he's ready to lead us into Change.
Second thing, this story about some of Obama's contacts/supporters, including a couple of domestic terrorists.
In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.
Oh, they're just activists; that bombing thing is just so yesterday.
Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.
Neither Ayers nor the Obama campaign would describe the relationship between the two men. Dr. Young described Obama and Ayers as “friends,” but there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation.
And as to the local political circles:
The relationship with Ayers gives context to his recent past in Hyde Park politics. It’s milieu in which a former violent radical was a stalwart of the local scene, not especially controversial.
It’s also a scene whose liberal ideological features — while taken for granted by the Chicago press corps that knows Obama best — provides a jarring contrast with Obama’s current, anti-ideological stance. This contrast between past and present — not least the Ayers connection — is virtually certain to be a subject Republican operatives will warm to if Obama is the Democratic nominee.
...
Though he is a respected figure in liberal educational circles, Ayers wrote recently about how in 2006 he was informed he was persona non grata at a progressive educators’ conference in the summer of 2006.
“We cannot risk a simplistic and dubious association between progressive education and the violent aspects of your past,” he quoted the conference organizers, whom he described as friends, as writing to him.
Don't you just love that? Their only problem with a terrorist- who's proud of it- showing up is "Someone might make troubling connections between you blowing things up and our progressive agenda."
But the couple has been embraced, by and large, in the liberal circles dominating Hyde Park politics.
...
Others are less inclined to even consider forgiveness.
“Ayers was a terrorist. Bernardine Dohrn was a terrorist. Ayers has never offered one word of apology — he glories in it, thinks it’s terrific. And that to me is not what I would call acceptable or mainstream behavior,” said Dan Polsby, a former law professor at Northwestern who is now dean of George Mason University Law School. “If Obama takes a different view on that — well, OK, that’s data about Obama.”
It damn sure does.
He described Ayers as “a professor of education at the University of Illinois-Chicago and a former aide to Mayor Richard J. Daley,” referring to printed reports that he had “advised” Daley on school reform.
Geez, no wonder the schools are so screwed up.
As Bloomberg News reported recently, Obama and Ayers have crossed paths repeatedly in the last decade. In 1997, Obama cited Ayers’ critique of the juvenile justice system in a Chicago Tribune article on what prominent Chicagoans were reading. He and Ayers served together on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago for three years starting in 1999. In 2001, Ayers also gave $200 to Obama’s state Senate reelection campaign.
Many details of the 1995 meeting are shrouded by time and by Obama’s and Ayers’ refusals to discuss it.
...
Personally, this seems to have far too much contact between them for this to be a "We just ran into each other occasionally" excuse to fly. I'll end with this on Obama:
They, like others in his old Chicago world, now consider him a bit too “conservative” for their liking, as Warren wrote recently.
Ackerman, the Hyde Park activist, complained of his votes for continued funding for the Iraq war.
“A lot of people were very angry when he voted to fund the war,” he said. “But any candidate running for president is going to strive for broader appeal and move more to the center — I don’t believe that Barack has departed from his basic principles.”
Dr. Young said, however, that he isn’t supporting either of the leading presidential candidates because he is a single-issue voter, and the issue is single-payer health care.
He said he was disappointed that Obama is “equivocating” on his support for single-payer health care, after saying in the past that he supported it. But he said Obama’s style — “cautious, deliberate, defensive” — was also familiar from the senator’s Hyde Park days.
Translation: Obama will say whatever he thinks will get the most votes, which means his word is no damn good. Much like Al Gore, he'll do damn near anything to get into that office.
I've mentioned before that I generally don't watch the Presidential 'debates' because I consider most of what comes out to be a very low grade of fertilizer. So I didn't hear about the bullcrap from Obama until today. Good overall of the mess over at QandO:
And then we have the "capturing Taliban weapons" for resupply bit. Uh, really? So we have half a platoon commanded by a captain on its own in Afghanistan without enough humvees, weapons and ammo having to capture weapons from the bad guys in order to fight?
Whoa, John Wayne, Clint Eastwood and Rambo are jealous. And that's pretty much the realm in which this story or "anecdote" belongs.
But again, he didn't know enough about it to know that.
And so forth. McQ points out the big thing about this(aside from telling this in the first place) is that neither Obama or anybody on his staff either knew enough about the military to catch the bullcrap, or didn't bother to, you know, check it out. Not a good thing in someone who says he's ready to lead us into Change.
Second thing, this story about some of Obama's contacts/supporters, including a couple of domestic terrorists.
In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.
Oh, they're just activists; that bombing thing is just so yesterday.
Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.
Neither Ayers nor the Obama campaign would describe the relationship between the two men. Dr. Young described Obama and Ayers as “friends,” but there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation.
And as to the local political circles:
The relationship with Ayers gives context to his recent past in Hyde Park politics. It’s milieu in which a former violent radical was a stalwart of the local scene, not especially controversial.
It’s also a scene whose liberal ideological features — while taken for granted by the Chicago press corps that knows Obama best — provides a jarring contrast with Obama’s current, anti-ideological stance. This contrast between past and present — not least the Ayers connection — is virtually certain to be a subject Republican operatives will warm to if Obama is the Democratic nominee.
...
Though he is a respected figure in liberal educational circles, Ayers wrote recently about how in 2006 he was informed he was persona non grata at a progressive educators’ conference in the summer of 2006.
“We cannot risk a simplistic and dubious association between progressive education and the violent aspects of your past,” he quoted the conference organizers, whom he described as friends, as writing to him.
Don't you just love that? Their only problem with a terrorist- who's proud of it- showing up is "Someone might make troubling connections between you blowing things up and our progressive agenda."
But the couple has been embraced, by and large, in the liberal circles dominating Hyde Park politics.
...
Others are less inclined to even consider forgiveness.
“Ayers was a terrorist. Bernardine Dohrn was a terrorist. Ayers has never offered one word of apology — he glories in it, thinks it’s terrific. And that to me is not what I would call acceptable or mainstream behavior,” said Dan Polsby, a former law professor at Northwestern who is now dean of George Mason University Law School. “If Obama takes a different view on that — well, OK, that’s data about Obama.”
It damn sure does.
He described Ayers as “a professor of education at the University of Illinois-Chicago and a former aide to Mayor Richard J. Daley,” referring to printed reports that he had “advised” Daley on school reform.
Geez, no wonder the schools are so screwed up.
As Bloomberg News reported recently, Obama and Ayers have crossed paths repeatedly in the last decade. In 1997, Obama cited Ayers’ critique of the juvenile justice system in a Chicago Tribune article on what prominent Chicagoans were reading. He and Ayers served together on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago for three years starting in 1999. In 2001, Ayers also gave $200 to Obama’s state Senate reelection campaign.
Many details of the 1995 meeting are shrouded by time and by Obama’s and Ayers’ refusals to discuss it.
...
Personally, this seems to have far too much contact between them for this to be a "We just ran into each other occasionally" excuse to fly. I'll end with this on Obama:
They, like others in his old Chicago world, now consider him a bit too “conservative” for their liking, as Warren wrote recently.
Ackerman, the Hyde Park activist, complained of his votes for continued funding for the Iraq war.
“A lot of people were very angry when he voted to fund the war,” he said. “But any candidate running for president is going to strive for broader appeal and move more to the center — I don’t believe that Barack has departed from his basic principles.”
Dr. Young said, however, that he isn’t supporting either of the leading presidential candidates because he is a single-issue voter, and the issue is single-payer health care.
He said he was disappointed that Obama is “equivocating” on his support for single-payer health care, after saying in the past that he supported it. But he said Obama’s style — “cautious, deliberate, defensive” — was also familiar from the senator’s Hyde Park days.
Translation: Obama will say whatever he thinks will get the most votes, which means his word is no damn good. Much like Al Gore, he'll do damn near anything to get into that office.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Why people like Val must want to chew nails at times
is pretty well covered by this post over at Winds of Change commenting on a piece of casto tongue-bathing:
You know that whole thing about the values of the Left having eroded into simple anti-Western Imperialism? There may be something to that, you know...
...and that's a Left I'm happy never to have been a part of, and never to be a part of. If the price of universal literacy is prison camps for writers, count me out. If the price of "decent standards of health care" is lavish living for the Party cadres and grinding poverty for everyone else, count me out. If the price of resisting apartheid is brutalizing and murdering your own citizenry - in essence creating a contest between two brutally repressive governments - count me out.
How, exactly, does Bertram keep any claim to moral authority after writing this?
The piece they quote is bad enough; go through the comments and get a taste of real, live, idiot-level leftist thought, including this:
...And while you guys like to point out and overemphasize the blinders you think "liberals" have concerning Cuba and communism (if you can even call the USSR at any point a communist country except nominally)you might want to check your own blinders. While at least the Cubans gave a shit about apartheid, what was the US doing?..
You really need to check it out, and a couple of supporting comments. Castro wasn't trying to help communists take over countries in Africa, he was nobly resisting apartheid. All that stuff that's been recorded about the appalling state of 'health care' in Cuba for all but communist party members and rich foreigners? Lies, all of it. Etc. Oh, and do note that the USSR wasn't EVER REALLY a communist country.
I'd say those people have their head up their ass, but even in that much crap they'd have to have some contact with reality. And the one clown quoting Kofi Annan as a great authority on right and wrong... I wonder if he even has contact with oxygen.
You know that whole thing about the values of the Left having eroded into simple anti-Western Imperialism? There may be something to that, you know...
...and that's a Left I'm happy never to have been a part of, and never to be a part of. If the price of universal literacy is prison camps for writers, count me out. If the price of "decent standards of health care" is lavish living for the Party cadres and grinding poverty for everyone else, count me out. If the price of resisting apartheid is brutalizing and murdering your own citizenry - in essence creating a contest between two brutally repressive governments - count me out.
How, exactly, does Bertram keep any claim to moral authority after writing this?
The piece they quote is bad enough; go through the comments and get a taste of real, live, idiot-level leftist thought, including this:
...And while you guys like to point out and overemphasize the blinders you think "liberals" have concerning Cuba and communism (if you can even call the USSR at any point a communist country except nominally)you might want to check your own blinders. While at least the Cubans gave a shit about apartheid, what was the US doing?..
You really need to check it out, and a couple of supporting comments. Castro wasn't trying to help communists take over countries in Africa, he was nobly resisting apartheid. All that stuff that's been recorded about the appalling state of 'health care' in Cuba for all but communist party members and rich foreigners? Lies, all of it. Etc. Oh, and do note that the USSR wasn't EVER REALLY a communist country.
I'd say those people have their head up their ass, but even in that much crap they'd have to have some contact with reality. And the one clown quoting Kofi Annan as a great authority on right and wrong... I wonder if he even has contact with oxygen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)